Advertisement

Initial Considerations Before Designing a Promoter Construct

  • David GouldEmail author
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1651)

Abstract

Before designing a synthetic promoter, it can be helpful to think about its final application. Is the study purely an in vitro exercise in monitoring short-term promoter activity from an episomal vector, or does the promoter eventually need to be permanently active and be integrated into the genome or perhaps even to function in vivo? The final application will have a bearing on promoter design and vector of choice from the start of the study. In this chapter I highlight some of the vector attributes to consider and features that should be thought about.

Key words

Immunogenicity Reporter genes Regulated promoters Replication Amplification 

References

  1. 1.
    Grieger JC, Samulski RJ (2005) Packaging capacity of adeno-associated virus serotypes: impact of larger genomes on infectivity and postentry steps. J Virol 79:9933–9944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wu J, Zhao W, Zhong L, Han Z, Li B, Ma W, Weigel-Kelley KA, Warrington KH, Srivastava A (2007) Self-complementary recombinant adeno-associated viral vectors: packaging capacity and the role of rep proteins in vector purity. Hum Gene Ther 18:171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maelandsmo GM, Ross PJ, Pavliv M, Meulenbroek RA, Evelegh C, Muruve DA, Graham FL, Parks RJ (2005) Use of a murine secreted alkaline phosphatase as a non-immunogenic reporter gene in mice. J Gene Med 7:307–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shimizu N, Miura Y, Sakamoto Y, Tsutsui K (2001) Plasmids with a mammalian replication origin and a matrix attachment region initiate the event similar to gene amplification. Cancer Res 61:6987–6990Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Levitt N, Briggs D, Gil A, Proudfoot NJ (1989) Definition of an efficient synthetic poly(A) site. Genes Dev 3:1019–1025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    SF Y, von Ruden T, Kantoff PW, Garber C, Seiberg M, Ruther U, Anderson WF, Wagner EF, Gilboa E (1986) Self-inactivating retroviral vectors designed for transfer of whole genes into mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 83:3194–3198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zufferey R, Dull T, Mandel RJ, Bukovsky A, Quiroz D, Naldini L, Trono D (1998) Self-inactivating lentivirus vector for safe and efficient in vivo gene delivery. J Virol 72:9873–9880PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mohamed H, Chernajovsky Y, Gould D (2016) Assembly PCR synthesis of optimally designed, compact, multi-responsive promoters suited to gene therapy application. Sci Rep 6:29388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chung JH, Bell AC, Felsenfeld G (1997) Characterization of the chicken beta-globin insulator. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:575–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bell AC, West AG, Felsenfeld G (1999) The protein CTCF is required for the enhancer blocking activity of vertebrate insulators. Cell 98:387–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baiker A, Maercker C, Piechaczek C, Schmidt SB, Bode J, Benham C, Lipps HJ (2000) Mitotic stability of an episomal vector containing a human scaffold/matrix-attached region is provided by association with nuclear matrix. Nat Cell Biol 2:182–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Piechaczek C, Fetzer C, Baiker A, Bode J, Lipps HJ (1999) A vector based on the SV40 origin of replication and chromosomal S/MARs replicates episomally in CHO cells. Nucleic Acids Res 27:426–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Verghese SC, Goloviznina NA, Skinner AM, Lipps HJ, Kurre P (2014) S/MAR sequence confers long-term mitotic stability on non-integrating lentiviral vector episomes without selection. Nucleic Acids Res 42:e53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muller-Kuller U, Ackermann M, Kolodziej S, Brendel C, Fritsch J, Lachmann N, Kunkel H, Lausen J, Schambach A, Moritz T et al (2015) A minimal ubiquitous chromatin opening element (UCOE) effectively prevents silencing of juxtaposed heterologous promoters by epigenetic remodeling in multipotent and pluripotent stem cells. Nucleic Acids Res 43:1577–1592Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Subang MC, Fatah R, Wu Y, Hannaman D, Rice J, Evans CF, Chernajovsky Y, Gould D (2015) Effects of APC de-targeting and GAr modification on the duration of luciferase expression from plasmid DNA delivered to skeletal muscle. Curr Gene Ther 15:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gambotto A, Dworacki G, Cicinnati V, Kenniston T, Steitz J, Tuting T, Robbins PD, DeLeo AB (2000) Immunogenicity of enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) in BALB/c mice: identification of an H2-Kd-restricted CTL epitope. Gene Ther 7:2036–2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Limberis MP, Bell CL, Wilson JM (2009) Identification of the murine firefly luciferase-specific CD8 T-cell epitopes. Gene Ther 16:441–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ginhoux F, Turbant S, Gross DA, Poupiot J, Marais T, Lone Y, Lemonnier FA, Firat H, Perez N, Danos O et al (2004) HLA-A*0201-restricted cytolytic responses to the rtTA transactivator dominant and cryptic epitopes compromise transgene expression induced by the tetracycline on system. Mol Ther 10:279–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cornelie S, Hoebeke J, Schacht AM, Bertin B, Vicogne J, Capron M, Riveau G (2004) Direct evidence that toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) functionally binds plasmid DNA by specific cytosine-phosphate-guanine motif recognition. J Biol Chem 279:15124–15129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Agudo J, Ruzo A, Kitur K, Sachidanandam R, Blander JM, Brown BD (2012) A TLR and non-TLR mediated innate response to lentiviruses restricts hepatocyte entry and can be ameliorated by pharmacological blockade. Mol Ther 20:2257–2267CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biochemical Pharmacology, William Harvey Research InstituteQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations